I have an E-10. It is a FABULOUS camera. If you're used to a 35mm SLR, it comes closest. You have an amazing amount of control over every aspect, and of course has fully automatic modes. The biggest differences between it and most others are the size of the CCD and the quality of the optics. Like a true 35mm and unlike most digitals you can shoot wide open (using aperture-preferred mode or manual) and get shallow depth of field.
The minuses: It is Big. It is MUCH bigger than my 35 SLR. Lens options are big, and expensive too, and although they work very well, the wide angle isn't as wide as I would like and the telephoto isn't as strong as I'd like either.
Still - I really, really, really like it.
Here's a sample:
Here's another sample: (Note - these pics are sized WAY down from the originals, which will print at 11x14" at true photo quality.)
I'm violating my own rule about posted pic size here. Given the topic I thought you might not mind.
[This message has been edited by greg (edited 12 June 2001).]
By the way, there is an excellent web site on all digital-camera related topics - with in-depth comparisons of every major camera on the market: http://www.dpreview.com/
How do you find the delay from the time you take a picture to the time it is ready to take the next one? My 600-l takes an ********* 10 seconds.
I have also heard that some have a focus issue as well as dead pixels on the CCD. One guy was talking about it not capturing the sky blues well. From your picture it does just fine.
Thanks for the feedback.
This is one I took with my 600-l this weekend but I want to have more control over the picture..
PS: Yeah that is where I was getting this info earlier today from the peoples reviews. Great minds thing alike! To bad I just lucked out with a Net Search!
[This message has been edited by Tim W (edited 12 June 2001).]
Tim - GREAT pic of your car. I have really struggled with a decent composition - you're way ahead of me in that department!
A really nice feature of the E-10 is a rapid-fire mode - you can actually shoot up to 4 full-res frames within a few seconds. It buffers them and writes them out at normal speed (for full res, it is several seconds per pic, like your camera) but it allows you to shoot while that process is going on.
I'll second the vote for the E-10. I'm generally a big Canon fan so the D30 should appeal to me. However, it costs about $1k more than the Olympus, and uses a cheaper CMOS sensor vs. CCD. The big advantage is that it takes standard EOS lenses, so that may sell you.
Other than the D30, there really is nothing I like compared to it. Some of our photographers love the Fuji FinePix, but I can't stand the upright design (I know, a small issue).
Go with the E-10 and you'll have no regrets - a few on Ebay have sold for around $1350.
(If price is an object though, grab the Kodak DC4800 at $450 - it rules for anything under $800!)
Aussie2u: You said "The big advantage is that it takes standard EOS lenses".
I learned something interesting after I bought the E-10. There is a valid reason that they designed it with the main lens fixed, and to support extension-type lenses instead of complete replacements.
In a 35mm camera, you have a shutter that protects the film while the lens is off. Moreover, every image is exposed on a new, clean film surface. But with digital, the CCD is right out there - no shutter, picture after picture. The potential to get dust on it, to ruin a lot of photos, and to damage the CCD with repeated cleaning, is high. The E-10 solution is to ensure a permanent seal. Makes sense, eh?
Greg, well yes and no. I talked with Mark Greenberg ("Mr. E-10") at PMA in February and he admitted it was more of a marketing spin than a required "feature".
Basically, Canon uses an oversize chip which "lines up" with the lens every time. It's very difficult to manufacture a camera with a removable mount and have it line up every time. Canon uses a much less expensive (to manufacture) CMOS sensor to do this. Supposedly it's difficult (or expensive) for manufactures with CCD's to do. Maybe thats part of the high cost of the Kodak & Nikon pro series units???
So yes, dust is a valid point but exemplified by Olympus in this case since they opted not to go with interchangeable lenses. Oh, and they are quick to point out their optional "lens adapters" are cheaper than a whole lens too - which is true.
m...father's day is coming up, my birthday is past...Christmas is too far away
Linear Mode
